Items tagged with inert


It is possible to display something like:

4 + 3 = x - 1

without Maple actually adding the 4 and 3 and putting that as a 7?


Same idea with sqrt. Is it possible to write sqrt(9) in a worksheet and actually seeing it as square root of 9 rather than a 3. Maple automatically simplifies everything so it's kinda hard to show a step by step process. Is there a way to solve this problem?

To be clear, I am talking about typing this into an active worsheet line. I know I can do a lot of this if I just do text becuase text lines obviously don't execute. They just display text. The reason I need to have this working is becuase sometimes I would have a command line where I want some of it to be excuted and some of it not so I can't just use text.

Thank you


I was wondering if there is a way to represent a matrix in a reduced state.  By this I am talking about:

      | 1/3 1/3|

A:=| 1/3 1/3|  Where A is 2x2 matrix.  I would like represent it as:


           | 1 1|

A:=1/3| 1 1| is that possible with maple???




I'd like to differentiate  3*(r/sqrt(a))+ (r/sqrt(a))^2  w.r.t  r/sqrt(a) and obtain

    3 + 2* (r/sqrt(a))

in otherwords, treat (r/sqrt(a)) as a single variable. This is what I tried:

v:=r/sqrt(a);    #the single expression to differentiate w.r.t

The problem is that when doing x^2 and x is r/sqrt(a), then it become r^2/a and it does not remain (r/sqrt(a))^2, so now the algsubs does not "see" it. I get as final answer

ofcourse, one can now try to simplify the above to the required form, maybe using assumptions or by dividing by sqrt(a) the numerator and denominator of the first term above to get  3+2*(r/sqrt(a)) but this is all requires extra work and can be hard depending on the result.

is there a better way to do the above so it works in general? The problem is in the function p, I need a way to tell Maple now to simplify it somehow. In Mathematica, I can do this like this:

Clear[p, x, r, a]
p[x_] := x^2 + 3*x;
v = r/Sqrt[a];
With[{v = x}, Inactive[D][p[v], v]];
% /. x -> v



I have a problem, to which I think the solution is to make ln(x) inert.  I'd like to be able to enter the following


and get back 


But of course Maple returns 

It seems to me that if I could make ln(x) inert for that might work, but I don't really know much about the ToInert command.  Or maybe this isn't the right approach.  

Does anyone know an easy way to convert %d_ to D? I tried the convert command, but no effect.  Thanks.



Often, I'd like to use variable names that look like expressions. Is there a way to convert them to some form of inert form or as some sort of literal (so that they are not a mathematical expression) ?

Such as,


Can't type it here, but I wanted 'a' subscript 1 superscript (2). I'd like it to not be a1 squared.

Basically, I'd like the subscripts and superscript to not mean anything mathematically . . . And, I use a1^(3), a1^(1), a2^(1), a2^(2), a2^(3), b2^(3), etc.


Thanks, for any suggests.


Cheers !!

A rigid rotating body is a moving mass, so that kinetic energy can have expressed in terms of the angular speed of the object and a new quantity called moment of inertia, which depends on the mass of the body and how it is such distributed mass. Now we'll see with maple.

(in spanish)


L. Araujo C.

In order to use efficient exponentiation modulo a number n, Maple help recommends using the inert &^ notation in the input, e.g. 5 &^ 1000 mod 29. But when I try to type this input in (default) 2D-Math mode, it interprets the ^ as it usually does for exponents and tries to "raise" the & to the power of 1000. Is there a way to do this correctly in 2D-Math, or do I constantly have to switch over to 1D-Math? I am using Maple 16. 


I have been looking at some new models of Casio Scientific Calculators and came across with "Fx-115es Plus" Model which seem to have a some sort of simple CAS(Computer Algebra System) built into it.

Two new features which i really liked were

(i) Ability to make any part of the expression inert and simplying the rest.

(ii) Fully Integrated Repeated decimal display for fractions.


I want to ask if there is any builtin commands that can achieve these two effects in maple.

I will give some example for each of these

(i) simplifying say 2^3*2^4 in maple gives 32.

but forexample if i want to make 2 in the bases inert then simplifying the result should give 2^7

if i make 3 inert then the result is 16*2^3

if i make 4 inert then the result is 8*2^4

another example say (2^3)^4 in maple gives 4096

but if i make 2 inert then the result should be 2^12

if i make 3 inert then the result is 16^3

if i make 4 inert then the result is 8^4

In this way it is possible to keep any interesting part of large complex expression unevaluated and simplifying the rest across it to maintain focus on the interesting part.

I know i can try to achieve this effect by using unevaluation quotes but they get messy and harder to track in large nested forms.

Another approach might be to replace the inert parts by explicit undeclared symbols with required assumptions and simplifying, but this is not it.

I know in Maple 18 they have introduced some package called InertForm or something, can it achieve this effect and also mark inert parts of the expression as grey like it is possible for some operators.

(ii) the example for the second is quite obvious, say given the fraction 237/14, evalf of this gives 16.92857143 but a result like 16.9Overscript[285714, _] is more closer to differentiation it from a irrational expansion. Sorry i donot know how to pretty print this here.

Another advantage is when i want to give some large repeating decimal expansion and have maple convert it to fractional form. Currently i have no idea how many times to repeat the decimals explicitly to make maple understand that it is a repeating decimal expansion.

I've got a very complicated integral, generated by Maple (15), of the form:


I need to do some manipulations on the integrand.  So, I perform the following:


f1:=perform operations on f(x)...etc


The trouble arises because sometimes Maple writes Z as shown above, and sometimes it writes it as:


and you can run the program twice in a row and you will get either form, randomly. So, sometimes Z1 will be wrong by a minus sign because you can't predict whether the minus sign is going to be embedded or not.

I've been complaining about this Maple property for years, to deaf ears within MapleSoft who insist it is not an issue, and it has been the subject of long discussions on this site that go nowhere.

So, the question becomes - how do I reliably extract the expression "a" from the expression for "Z" and how do I test whether it has a minus sign embedded within it, or explicitly showing.

This can drive you crazy if you are trying to do a calculation or write a program that always works.

Page 1 of 1